Re: missing bar numbers after manual line breaks within incomplete measures: bug or feature?

[pls]

On 01.10.2013, at 16:41, Alexander Kobel <address@hidden> wrote:
Hi Alexander,
> 
> Any integer bar number at the start of the system would be misleading, as you 
> probably figured. In your example, the proper number to place after the break 
> would be 5.5, right? What if you put "5" there and the conductor tells the 
> player to start "at measure 5"? That's beginning of the line, or back in time 
> from the break?
I certainly didn't want to suggest to have a bar number at the beginning of a 
line starting with an incomplete measure!  That would be misleading, indeed! ;)
> More general, there's a good point why the rule is avoid breaks inside a 
> measure: keeping track of bar numbers is fairly easy, keeping track of 
> accidentals can be more involved. Double-check for clarity there; I remember 
> one song where my choir memorized a wrong note, probably for exactly this 
> reason, and I had a really hard time correcting them when I conducted the 
> piece years later.
> 
> That being said, I also sometimes use in-measure line breaks if (I think) it 
> makes sense. So far that's exclusively for canons with upbeats, where I want 
> the systems to approximately line up, or songs
> - with several stanzas,
> - where the chorus comes first,
> - the stanzas start with a partial, and
> - ending the chorus system with a lot of first syllables looks terrible.
> In this case, I give a bar number to the first full measure in the new 
> system, as you suggested; having to place it manually is okay IMHO, since you 
> already enforced the break.
I do a lot of conversions of MusicXML files to LilyPond.  So most of the time I 
don't enforce the breaks manually but try to keep them were they were in the 
XML file.  Some (short) pieces with several partials end up with no bar numbers 
at all after the conversion / compilation.  My gut feeling is telling me that 
the first full measure in a new system should have a bar number by default.  
But I might be mistaken...

thx
patrick
> 
> 
> Best,
> Alexander